Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)

Non-specific medical conditions (such as headaches, sleep problems, nervousness and concentration disorders) have steadily increased over the past decades, sometimes at very high rates. Many illnesses indicate a multisystem disorder, caused by our modern lifestyle and environmental conditions that affect health [1]. The human body reacts to the often multiple exposures with a wide range of symptoms, ranging from stress to illness [2]. Multisystem disorders also include so-called “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” (EHS) – also known as “electrohypersensitivity”, “electrosensitivity”, or “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” – a reaction of the body to artificially generated electromagnetic fields, which arise, among other source “from devices or exposure to infrastructure, such as mobile phones, DECT cordless landlines, Wi-Fi/Bluetooth enabled computers, Wi-Fi routers, smart meters, base station antennas, electric vehicles, power lines, household electrical appliances and other low intensity exposures” [43]. Studies in several countries show that approximately 5% of the population could be affected.

Coherence is rarely seen here, but has long been lamented in the scientific community. It has been observed that affected individuals develop physical symptoms even when they are unaware that sources of radiation are triggering them. Despite growing awareness, there is still a lack of widespread recognition, reliable research, and effective preventive measures – while technological developments (e.g., 5G, smart meters) raise radiation exposure worldwide. Many affected individuals avoid places with high exposure and are therefore often excluded from social life (restaurants, cinemas, theatre, shopping in a city centre, etc). For this reason EHS is recognised in some countries (e.g. Sweden), as a functional disability. Despite from electromagnetic fields people feel healthy. EHS is accepted like a manufactured illness triggered by the massively increasing use of artificial electromagnetic energies for information transmission (Reith 2022) [32].

We demand recognition of EHS as a disease in Europe, a reduction of EMF radiation exposure through binding protective regulations for everyone, and a systemic approach to explaining, diagnosing, and treating this complex disease.

What are multisystem diseases? How does EHS manifest? How can you tell if you are affected? How can they be diagnosed? What can be done to alleviate symptoms?

Human beings have no specific sensory organ or similar known for detecting artificially generated electromagnetic fields (EMFs) surrounding us. We distinguish between low-frequency fields (LF-EMFs, such as those occurring in household and railway electricity) and high-frequency electromagnetic fields (HF-EMFs), which, for example, are caused by cell towers, cell phone radiation, or Wi-Fi. At higher intensities, HF-EMFs have the property of warming tissue. Current exposure limits are based on the assumption that EMFs can only have biological effects if enough energy is transmitted to quickly raise tissue temperature by at least 1°C (“thermal effects”). The current limits are designed to protect against excessive heating.

However, these fields can also have various effects on cells and living organisms well below exposure limits (“non-thermal effects“). Studies demonstrate different approaches to biological health effects at molecular, cellular, and organ levels. EMFs can interfere with biological processes even at low, everyday intensities, which can slowly and gradually burden organisms. Some people can compensate for this better than others. In people who are less able to compensate, this can lead to hypersensitivity to these fields and radiation. After hypersensitization, organisms respond to EMFs even at very low intensities. See studies by Belpomme et al. [4], Belpomme & Irigary [39], Havas [10], McCarty et al. [16], Panagopoulos [19], Panagopoulos et al. [20], Redmayne and Reddel [21], Sage [22], Schuermann and Mevissen [23], Thill et al. [25], Papadopoulus [40], Papadopoulus et al. [41].

Even the terms for EHS vary greatly. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses the term “IEI-EMF“, which refers to the symptoms of patients who attribute their complaints to EMF. In this context, it is not determined whether the connection is due to causality (a real cause-effect relationship), misattribution (the symptoms actually come from something else), or a nocebo effect (negative expectation). This doubt that the connection, often painstakingly determined by those affected, is real, often leads to the affected individuals not being taken seriously.

We refer to “EHS“ as the causal reaction with symptoms to EMFs, whether it occurs consciously or unconsciously (i.e., without having recognized the connection to EMFs). We assume that the majority of patients with IEI-EMF are truly suffering from EMF, and that, in addition, a significant number of patients do have EHS symptoms but have not yet recognized the connection to EMF. To gain certainty on this, we desire high-quality studies on the topic (and on the problems to be solved in this context, see the chapter “Studies on EHS“, as well as ANSES [1], Bevington [21], Bevington [7], Redmayne & Reddel [21], Stein & Udasin [24], Thoradit [8].

Nonetheless, the European Parliament, the EESC (the European Economic and Social Committee), and the Council of Europe have recognized that electrosensitivity and electromagnetic hypersensitivity are illnesses [31]. These overall uncertain and non-legally binding classifications ultimately result in EHS sufferers finding it difficult to identify doctors who will take them seriously and treat them competently. There is therefore an urgent need for clarification and, above all, a binding regulation.

Symptoms of EHS and IEI-EMF can include: sleep disturbance, difficulty falling asleep, headache, fatigue (usually after staying in city centres or other areas with high levels of mobile phone exposure), dizziness, nausea, pain in muscles or joints and neuralgia, tense muscles, tinnitus, ear pain, palpitations, heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, extreme fatigue, susceptibility to infections, and neurological deficits (“brain fog”) with difficulty in concentrating, finding words and memorising, AD(H)D, depression, as well as sudden muscle weakness or epilepsy. Effects on blood sugar have also been observed, see Bevington [7], Havas [10], Stein & Udasin [24].

Various studies (see ANSES [1], BfS [38]) show that a growing number of people (currently about 1% – 5% of the population) suffer from IEI-EMF. Reliable figures on the incidence of EHS are not available. We expect that the number of people affected by IEI-EMF is significantly lower than the number of people affected by EHS, for the following reasons:

There are well-documented individual cases with diagnosed EHS (proof of existence).

Health effects are described [33] and studies demonstrate the effectiveness of programs [34] against acute symptoms based on these health effects.

There are many observations, even documented by doctors, that it is only after years of suffering from symptoms and complaints that EHS patients become aware of the cause of their suffering. Therefore it takes years before they are being classified as IEI-EMF patients and years after the onset of symptoms.

The incidence of illness should be expected to increase accordingly with the expansion of wireless communication, rising in line with the health effects involved.. This is being observed [2], with an increase in certain brain tumours, thyroid [44], prostate [45] and colorectal cancer [48] even among young people, an increase in neurodegenerative diseases, and hospital statistics [13]. However, we do not claim the expansion of wireless communication to be the only reason for this increase.

People affected by EHS often experience a progressive course with increasingly severe symptoms. While the onset of symptoms was initially very delayed after the start of exposure, so that a connection was usually not suspected, this latency period often becomes shorter. On the other hand, symptoms no longer disappear with the end of exposure but continue for hours or days [24]. It also happens that mild EHS disappears with de-exposure [27].

EHS usually only occurs later in life. Havas [10] identifies five possible precursors of EHS, of which at least one applies to EHS sufferers:

1. physical trauma of the central nervous system (injuries of the back or head, brain concussion, etc.),
2. exposure to toxic substances (e.g., mould, heavy metals),
3. infections (e.g., Epstein-Barr virus, Lyme disease),
4. acute or prolonged exposure to electromagnetic fields,
5. impaired (overactive or underactive) immune system.

In severe cases of EHS, there is a risk of developing (chronic) autonomic exhaustion, a permanently overexcited autonomic nervous system with an inability to regenerate, as well as neurodegenerative diseases and metabolic failure. They often result in incapacity to work. According to the Bevington Review [7], approximately 0.6% of the population are currently incapable to work due to EHS/IEI-EMF.

So far, apart from a few individual case studies (see, for example, Waldmann-Selsam [40], Thoradit [8]) there do not appear to be any suitable studies that meaningfully examine the causal relationship between exposure and symptoms. If one wants to demonstrate these reactions through provocation studies (as recommended by the WHO), this is usually not successful, as study designs would be required that ensure EMF-free travel routes and individually varying effective exposure scenarios (frequency mix, polarization, modulation, electric and magnetic components, other stressors, etc.).

Studies have shown that a nocebo effect may contribute. However, according to the French health authority ANSES, a nocebo effect is not considered a trigger of EHS. In very many cases, the symptoms began many years before any connection with electromagnetic fields was suspected (cf. ANSES [1] and Leszczynski [14]).

Many of the EHS symptoms can already be logically explained by the aspects and connections mentioned above. However, there are manifestations of EHS that gradually spread to more and more organ systems. These can often be alleviated through therapies or special meditations that were actually developed for trauma therapy. Why is this plausible?

The Association of European Environmental Physicians [5] describes EHS (perhaps also a subtype of what we refer to as EHS) as “EMF-related complaints and diseases” and classifies them as so-called multisystem diseases (i.e., a disease that affects multiple organ systems simultaneously), whose cause lies in the environment. Sibylle Reith describes the complexity and variety of health effects in her publication [32] titled “Recognizing and Understanding Multisystem Diseases: On the Undercomplex Perception and Care of Complex Diseases. Facts on an Ignored but Relevant Medical Emergency“. According to her, various organs/systems are affected, and metabolic imbalances can occur. The system is stressed to tipping points and beyond. In each person, symptoms and triggers, as well as the intensity of symptoms are individual. She explains that “so-called “acquired multisystemic complex diseases” can hardly be surpassed in terms of complexity, the complaints are considered “medically inexplicable” to varying degrees, and each of these diseases is fighting for recognition.” For example, multisystem diseases have in common that “there is no such thing as one cause, but an accumulation of stress develops. Material stimuli (e.g. viruses, environmental pollutants) and non-material (e.g. electromagnetic) stimuli interact synergistically and result in biochemically similar reaction cascades. Due to quantitatively and qualitatively unmanageable influences, the regulating processes in the immune, hormonal and nervous systems are extremely challenged. This results in unique, individual combinations of multisystem malfunctions. The psyche is also affected.” According to Reith, the multisystemic patient needs “personalized, interdisciplinary diagnosis and treatment.”

This makes it clear that within the often oversimplifying scientific-toxicological reasoning context of: “Here is the cause/noxious agent, there is the effect”, it is hardly possible to achieve simple insights, classifications, and therapies. The following statements should be understood in this context.

Meanwhile, thousands of studies have shown how mobile communications can fundamentally stress or damage cells, tissues, and body functions (especially opening of voltage-gated ion channels, oxidative/nitrosative cell stress, impairment of cellular respiration, damage to mitochondria and the blood-brain barrier, secondary DNA damage). Considering only studies with realistic exposure, the review by Panagopoulos [19] finds biological effects (“adverse effects“) in almost 100% of the studies. Recent studies conducted on humans in real conditions have shown that exposure to mobile phones [49] and mobile phone base stations [50] induce cytotoxic effects, cell cycle disruption or chromosomal aberrations.

The various mechanisms can also occur in combination and amplify each other. Many of them can directly explain EHS symptoms as a result of EMF exposure that was long enough (long-term mitochondrial damage, changes in the nervous system, general energy deficiency, etc.).

In healthy individuals, the mentioned damages or stressors can generally be repaired or buffered; however, no one knows whether this applies throughout life. The occurrence of the “Havana Syndrome” or the complaints of US diplomats in Moscow, who were deliberately exposed to EMF for years at intensities below western exposure limits and subsequently became ill, indicate a potential risk for everyone.

People with genetically determined changes in the activity of enzymes that reduce oxidative cell stress have a tenfold increased risk of EHS, which makes involvement of oxidative cell stress likely at least in a subgroup of EHS patients [9]. A large review has shown that oxidative cell stress is increased by EMF [30] and is beyond dispute [23]. For interrelations between oxidative and nitrosative cell stress (ROS/RNS) with other risks, see: Kostoff et al. [12], Pall [12], Pall [17], Pall [18], Pall [35], Panagopoulos Yakymenko et al. [30].

Multisystem diseases such as EHS are presumably triggered or intensified by the biological system taking harmful processes like those mentioned above seriously. So-called sensitization as a principle is already known from sea snails: reactions to repeated harmless stimuli usually become weaker over time. If the harmless stimuli occur together with a harmful stimulus, a lasting startle response to the harmless stimulus is learned. It is assumed that these principles are even more characteristic of higher organisms. In humans, with the biological system “taking EHS symptoms seriously” is likely mediated by the brain regions amygdala (danger detector) and insula (immune system reflexes) [26] and leads to an upregulation of the sympathetic nervous system (in the sense that the organism should be able to flee) and to a decrease of parasympathetic activity (in the sense that flight and vigilance are given a higher priority than repair).

The latter prevents the body’s regeneration, so that damage that is regularly repaired in healthy individuals accumulates in these people. More and more cells and organs are damaged in a highly unpredictable order: a multisystem disease has developed. An overview of these processes is shown in the following diagram.

This explanatory theory well accounts for the often observed downward spiral of increasingly severe symptoms and an ever-lower threshold of reactivity in EHS, as well as the relative absence of symptoms when exposure is strictly avoided. According to Y. Stein [36] (head of a pain clinic in Israel), those most severely affected can only live in shielded rooms until the symptoms improve, but even then, only limited exposure can be tolerated.

This theory could also explain that in some cases daily and longer meditation or therapeutic approaches that work for trauma can reduce the acute EHS symptoms, even though mobile phone use was not consciously associated with symptoms in the development of EHS. Even when excessive sympathetic activity decreases again, the existing damage caused by EMF can be so severe that individuals still require regeneration outside of EMF in order to avoid reaching health-relevant tipping. The direct damage cannot be plausibly fought with these forms of therapy.

A diagnosis is made based on a detailed environmental medical history (and complaints). So far, there are no specific diagnostics. However, ICD-10 codes Z57 or Z58 can be used for EHS.

Symptoms are very individual, as described above. For example, if heart rhythm disturbances occur under EMF exposure, a continuous ECG with a recording of the radiation exposure is indicated. If a patient is severely exhausted, mitochondrial status as well as oxidative and nitrosative stress should be determined. If sweating occurs, hormone status and neurotransmitters are examined.

A correlation between EMF exposure and the symptoms should always be established, with the timing correlation being individual; that is, symptoms may appear with a delay and then decrease.

The situation is multifactorial – with the same radiation exposure, an individual’s symptoms can vary in intensity. This means that the same person can react differently and with different symptoms to the same radiation, depending on his/her current individual condition and on external influences (e.g., lack of sleep, stress, flu-like infection, exhaustion, blood sugar levels before/after meals, etc.).

An important criterion is that the symptoms decrease in low-exposure environments, while taking into account the individual and multifactorial delay time (see above).

The laboratory parameters are primarily used to clarify at which level the damage or influences occur. Accordingly, appropriate therapeutic measures can be initiated.

There are attempts to define biological markers of EHS (see Belpomme et al. [3], Belpomme et al. [4], De Luca et al. [9], Leszczynski [14]), but due to the various combinations of damage mechanisms, they are likely only applicable to a portion of those with EHS. Abnormalities in antioxidant potential are currently the most promising candidates. However, documented changes in the conduction of certain brain regions through functional magnetic resonance imaging also exist, see Heuser and Heuser [11], Stein and Udasin [24].

Experiences of patients shows that the following measures or a combination of them have proven effective [10]:

• Reduction of exposure: in general, de-exposure is most helpful (removal of all EMF-emitting devices from one’s own household and use of wired devices (LAN cable, corded phone), proper shielding, moving to a low-exposure environment [5],[48]).
• Supporting the immune system through good nutrition that increases antioxidant capacity, balancing vitamin/mineral deficiencies, regular exercise, good sleep quality (which is difficult to achieve for EHS sufferers), stress management, avoidance of toxins, healing of infections, elimination of infection sources (e.g., extracting teeth or after root-canal treatment).
• Supporting the mitochondria through balancing vitamin/mineral deficiencies and, if necessary, through additional/hyperbaric oxygen, e.g., via portable oxygen devices.
• In cases of high blood pressure caused by an overactive sympathetic nervous system, calcium channel blockers can alleviate the symptoms.
• Detoxification to boost the elimination of toxins (support of liver function, infusions with chelating agents, including the removal of amalgam dental fillings).
• Supporting the limbic system and/or the autonomic nervous system. The progression of the multisystem disease may possibly be slowed down or halted through signals of safety and security for the limbic system. This can be aimed for through practices like staying in (low-exposure) natural environments, meditation, yoga, Qi Gong, MBSR (mindfulness-based stress reduction), autogenic training, trauma- or analytical psychotherapy-or EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) [37?].The Gupta Program [34] or the Dynamic Neural Retraining System [33] have significantly reduced acute symptoms in some EHS sufferers after consistent practising over several months, but they have not necessarily stopped the gradual progressive damage to various organ systems.
• Additionally, living with a multisystem disease is very burdensome. This is further amplified in EHS by the fact that those affected are usually neither believed nor taken seriously by most doctors, psychologists, colleagues or friends, and moreover, participation in social life is extremely limited to almost impossible, and low-exposure living spaces are hardly available. Due to the ongoing expansion of networks, a living situation that currently leads to symptom-free conditions can become unsuitable at any time. Learning to cope with this stress can activate the parasympathetic nervous system more strongly, which is necessary for recovery from any illness. Activities found to be helpful include, for example, staying in low-exposure natural environments, meditation, yoga, Qi Gong, MBSR (mindfulness-based stress reduction), autogenic training, trauma- or analytical psychotherapy-or EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing), regularly staying in a shielded chamber (according to Prof. Pöppel [37]).

People with EHS face a number of limitations in the digital society, whether at work, in healthcare, or in their free time. Nevertheless, people with EHS have the same rights as everyone else. These rights are based on The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The right to inclusion and accessibility

People with EHS, like everyone else, have the right to inclusion and accessibility. The principle of inclusion is to take into account the differences between people so that anyone who wants to can participate fully in society. In an inclusive society, all people should have access to all facilities (e.g., public facilities, public transportation, public gatherings, and workplaces), regardless of whether they have a disability or not. For people who are sensitive to electromagnetic fields, this is often not the case at present.

UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

The right to accessibility and inclusion for persons with disabilities is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This convention obliges governments to create policies that enable persons with disabilities to live like everyone else. Under the UN Convention, people with EHS are considered persons with disabilities and, like everyone else, have the right to participate fully in society [51].